RAIA President

If, as is often said, architecture is the mother of all the arts, then in years to come the late twentieth century may be seen as a time when the parent lost its way. Taking a rare moment to contemplate the state of contemporary architecture, it is disturbing to realise that a once noble and respected pursuit has been reduced to grappling with the ogre of commercial expediency for its very livelihood.

In bygone eras, architecture had an integral relationship with society. The pyramids as tombs of the pharoahs were a focus of daily life in ancient Egypt. The Mayan, Toltec and Aztec temples of Central and South America were erected in honour of the gods and housed the priests and nobles who dictated to the people how they should live, and the great medieval castles of Europe were sanctuaries for whole communities.

In more ancient cultures still, such as the indigenous peoples of Australia, North America and the Arctic, architecture reflected available construction materials, the surrounding environment and unsurpassed pragmatism. What then will future historians say about architecture in the late twentieth century? Few buildings impact upon society the way those of the ancients did. Of course, our society is not that of thousands of years ago. Technology (television, computers, the Internet) has changed our lives immeasurably. Today, you can do everything without even leaving your home. In this age, then, we might ask is architecture merely an indulgent irrelevance? In 1996, there are few really great leaders. The Cold War is over and with a few notable exceptions world peace prevails. The post baby boom generations are without a cause of the magnitude of Vietnam, conscription, or emancipation to unite and focus their energies. Of course, the environmental imperative is a possibility, but that has been politicised almost to the point of apathy. What place, then, does architecture have here?

Ironically, the technological age has restored the need to address quality of life. Recent government rhetoric talks of redeveloping and revitalising our cities - yet what is being done to prevent the mistakes of the past which are the root of these problems? Do people really care about the impact of individual buildings on our built environment? Do they care about good design? Do they care that the design process sets the asset value of our built works for this and future generations?

In former times, the architectural client knew they would be responsible for owning and operating a building for the whole of its useful life and they had a real concern in controlling the design process which determined the quality of that building and its ongoing running costs. Today many of the buildings of our cities are viewed simply as investment opportunities not to be held by the owner/developer but to be disposed of for profit. This has produced a major shift in the cultural values relating to our built environment. Clients with a primary concern for minimising initial cost and construction time in order to maximise investment return by early sale have little regard for the long term economic and clutural value of the buildings they produce.

The way in which architects are forced to think and work today revolves around the current job with little time for consideration of the “big picture”. In particular, rampant practices such as fee-bidding are further eroding the viability of architectural firms and their capacity to attract adequate fees for service. Is the answer, then, that architects have to be more flexible and change their product to deliver what the market wants? Is it, more than anything else, its own failure to come to terms with the demands of the marketplace, which will see the profession’s continued marginalisation?

The one area in which architects can really differentiate themselves from the rest of the marketplace is design. Good design solutions must continue to come out of the science and art of architecture. As a profession we have a responsibility to raise the quality of the appreciation and knowledge of building design by our clients, to educate them about the consequences of their decisions. It is no coincidence that great architecture comes from the briefs of enlightened clients. Only by voracious edification of clients and potential clients will we restore our ability to influence the relationship between society and the places it lives and works, and make a truly worthwhile contribution to the quality of life enjoyed by the whole community, now and in years to come.